Kathleen Funchion (Carlow-Kilkenny, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I did not see the Minister of State's amendment until late this evening. I should know better at this stage but I actually thought that the Government might support my motion because what is contained in it is solutions. It is all done in very serious consultation with the sector, and it was not done overnight. It was not a case of a few phone calls a few days before we decided to put down this motion. This consultation has been going on for years. I recall doing a report for the children's committee in 2017 about the terms and conditions and the wages in the childcare sector. Three years later the same issues exist. I got a text during this debate from somebody to say that they have heard of a closure just today in Limerick, with 90 staff let go. These are very serious issues. Part of me wants to give the Minister of State the benefit of the doubt. As someone who has worked previously with her I genuinely wish her, and the Minister, well. I see myself as somebody who wants to work constructively with people but, unfortunately, my instinct is telling me that if the Minister of State were genuine about this and really wanted to see solutions and action she would have supported the motion and not tabled the amendment.

The amendment states that the Minister wants to support the achievement of appropriate terms and conditions for the early learning and care workforce. What does that even mean? What does she believe are the appropriate terms and conditions? I believe everybody should start on at least the living wage and deserve to have a wage scale. That is an issue we have been talking about for years in this Chamber and in the children's committee. The consultation has been done. I can give the Minister scores of names of people in organisations who will happily consult with her in the morning. All of them support this motion. The sector supports this motion. The consultation and the solutions are available. If the Minister of State is genuine and serious about this, and if she does want to work with people, I urge her to withdraw her amendment and support our motion. The one thing she can do because it was done at the end of March or in April is reinstate the wage subsidy scheme at 100%. I refer to the number of people who have had their wages cut, and it is not the fault of the providers. They do not have the funds. If she did that much at least it would demonstrate that she is serious and that she wants to take real action. It would also mean that people could keep their jobs and their wages. That would be the very first step. There is much more to be done but those of us here who have been working on this issue for the past number of years have many solutions, in consultation with the sector. The one piece of advice I would give the Minister is to consult with the sector. Do not use it as an excuse to draw something out over years but have meaningful and genuine consultation. I really hope that the meeting she has with SIPTU is not to say to its representatives that she supports a sector employment order. As someone who worked in the trade union movement for years, that is not the answer here. The Minister of State has the power to introduce a wage scale starting at the living wage. She should at least start at reinstating the wage subsidy scheme at 100% because there will not be a sector this time next year if there is not genuine investment and if this issue is not taken seriously. That is the reality. Every Deputy on this side of the House has said that, and both Ministers have acknowledged that there are issues. I appeal to the Minister of State to do the right thing and withdraw her amendment, support our motion, be serious about it and work with us on the solutions.

See this speech in context